Joek3rr
Master Member
Well, that's rude
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Post-release)
- Thread starter dbuck
- Start date
Well, that's rude
nickytea
Master Member
It isn't even the subtext of the prequels ... it's the entire surface text. Yoda literally says the words, "failed, I have" and goes into exile. TLJ embraces this idea and renders it into actionable, thematic drama. But this interpretation of I - III has existed since (before) 2005. It has always been the root of my defense of those movies, and if this forum hadn't hopped hosts so many times over the last 17 years I've been a member, you'd be able to find the "evidence" right here.
The idea that TLJ or Rian "put" these ideas into people's heads is insulting in both directions. He was willing to look a few layers deep into movies that most would prefer to forget, and actually allowed the entire saga to influence his sequel. (Rather than keep worshiping the same 2.5 movies and hoping to recapture an ineffable period of the late 70s / early 80s like TFA so vainly sought.)
Holding that interpretation has nothing to do with dragging down the past films in the series. On the contrary, it's giving them a bigger bear-hug than any of the other modern installments have dared to do.
Delving into medieval European history for a bit... We in the modern era have seriously fallen victim to a centuries-old game of Telephone regarding the "Holy Grail". The accepted notion that it's the cup that holds *****' blood of everlasting life is from later misinterpretations of the earliest Grail stories. Those were originally from a couple Templars -- one German, one French. But in both cases, the Grail isn't a physical object -- it's a discipline, a way of life. It's the striven-for dedication of the Holy Knight to be mindful of himself, of the temptations and distractions the world throws at us, and the ongoing process of re-dedication to the Grail -- a Teutonic word meaning line or path. In a roundabout way, it's where we get the more contemporary saying "walking the straight and narrow".
There's much in Star Wars that draws from this. Including the above. Once a Padawan or other initiate into the Mysteries of the Force becomes aware of Ashla and Bogan, they must learn to be mindful of the presence and influence of each in themselves and work to not skew too far off the balance point. Unfortunately, Lucas forgot all that when he decreed that the Light Side is the true aspect of the Force, with the Dark Side being a warped corruption, and that the Force being in "balance" means -- a fairly unbalanced -- no Dark Side. But the teachings of Obi-Wan, Yoda, and Qui-Gon throughout the OT and PT focus on meditation, self-knowledge, opening up one's awareness to the universe, passivity, calmness... Recognizing emotion, but not letting it drive one. Instinct without attachment. I like to call that the Jedi Grail. Alas, long forgotten by most by the time of the films. At the risk of dancing near the subject of contemporary politics, they've spent the last 4,000 years very determinedly not being Sith, while, over the same span, the Sith have dedicated themselves to not being Jedi. To the point that that could be used to describe each sect. "Sith: Not Jedi". That kind of extreme polarization is both unhealthy and unsustainable.
I'd argue that what Luke was probably originally looking for with Ben, what tacitly maybe got passed on to Rey, is some first-sources Jedi teachings that date from before all of that sectarian strife, when the Jedi were more balanced in themselves and the galaxy wasn't pinging between one extreme and the other.
I hope not. If that is the direction they go, they're goingg to have to address the fate that Vader dodged by dying right after his reversion to the Light: How does someone steeped in so much blood atone for it to the satisfaction of the galaxy his actions have harmed?
Intriguing. I'm used to seeing those on the outside of the circle:
View attachment 851356
(I've considered that, for the last eight years, since it came out, indicative of the primordial Jedi Order sigil prior to the Schisms that led to the Jedi keeping the winged sword motif and the Sith taking the spiked ring.)
Plus, after Rebels, I can't help but wonder if that symbol "in the middle" is, indeed, The One In The Middle...
First of all, I gotta raise an eyebrow at the dismissive tone of that terminology. Like it or don't like it, everything submitted had to go past editors to get published. Yeah, early-early, things were a lot more lax as far as what made it in, but at least by the late '80s, the publishers were doing their best to enforce consistency, continuity, and verisimilitude (i.e., "Swarziness"). Not going to get into how well they succeeded or how badly they failed as gatekeepers. The dropped balls are why the Story Group was created in the first place, after all. But it's a hell of a lot more than "fan fiction" (even when there are obvious Gary-Stu characters and such).
Anyway. You were saying...?
Tidying up some points here. The shift in 2014 as far as the nature of the EU was a very subtle one, from "tacitly canon until it isn't" (i.e., since George doesn't pay much attention ti it, he could blithely overwrite anything at any point without notice) to "tacitly not canon until it is". There have already been many references in the new canon to a lot of the stuff from the end of ROTJ all the way back in the EU. Those of us who pay attention to such minutiæ are pretty sure stuff from the KOTOR era is going to be largely unaffected. Stuff ancillary to things we saw in Clone Wars and Rebels regarding Mandalore reinforce a lot of their role vis-à-vis the Republic and the reorganization of things a thousand years before the films. So, except for things that are directly contradicted or overwritten by the films and series and new-canon books and comics, everything up until ROTJ in the EU is generally safe-ish.
Your examples above are all from the post-ROTJ period, which they deliberately and drastically wiped to start fresh. Mara might very well be out there somewhere -- she just ain't with Luke. Corran might very well be out there somewhere. He didn't join the Rebellion/Republic until after ROTJ. Heck, he might even have been one of the best pilots in the new Republic Navy -- maybe even turned to Luke to train him in the Jedi arts. But by the time the Resistance is formed, he'd be in his 40s. If he stayed with the Republic, he'd've died in the Hosnian system. He might be somewhere in the Resistance that we haven't seen. Resistance and the opening of TFA both show that Leia's hotshot pilots get sent out on special missions... *shrug* But we've known since 2014 that this new post-ROTJ period is not going to follow the previously-established EU version of events. And I'm fine with that. There's enough "certain point of view" stuff in that period, I can gleefully work with it.
And it wasn't even supposed to be that until around 1995.
Okay. Explanation forthcoming: The First Order isn't that big. Nowhere near the scope, power, or ability of the Empire. The Empire got going with the full resources of the Galactic Republic behind it. The First Order grew out of Palpatine's contingency plans. It got started not too long after the Battle of Jakku, and undisclosed resources were already in place in the Unknown Regions for those fleeing the fall of the Empire to meet up with, consolidate, and move forward their plans. Over a quarter-century, they have built some ships -- but not the thousands the Empire had, trained many soldiers -- but not the many millions the Empire had, and had been covertly seeking support within known space. By the time of TFA, many ostensibly Republic worlds who miss the "good old days" under the Empire have been funneling support to the First Order.
When and how Snoke got involved in all this is as yet unknown. As unknown as Palpatine's homeworld was in 1980. There's a little bit out there currently that indicates he and Palpatine had some sort of rivalry and Snoke, basically, lost. Not sure if he was exiled or if he fled to the Unknown Regions. He might have been set up in place by Palpatine in the event this day came. He might have been out there and, in Palpatine's absence, was able to take advantage and take over.
At this point in the OT narrative, we knew there was an Empire, thus an Emperor was implicit. He was spoken to have dissolved the Senate and conferred governance directly to the regional Moffs. He looked old and spooky in the larger-than-life hologram conversation he had with Vader. I remember speculation as to whether that was really the Emperor or a Wizard of Oz style simulacrum. Vader addressed him as "Master", but sought to overthrow him with the help of his son. Thanks to the Star Wars novelization, we knew his name was Palpatine. And that's pretty much it. So, so far, I'm seeing a parity. For that matter, the Prequels didn't go into how the Republic formed or how Vallorum got elected or the inner workings of Naboo's weird political/governmental structure, etc.
Let's see... First of all, we didn't get Luke's father's name until ROTJ, so we're not to that point in the story yet.
We knew that he was being raised by his aunt and uncle, so presumably his parents were dead. From dialogue, it's apparent he's been with his aunt and uncle for the entirety of his conscious memory. We know zilch about his mom until ROTJ, so it's not relevant here. First we find out that his father was a Jedi Knight like Ben Kenobi, rather than his uncle's fiction. Then, in the next film, Vader tells him he's his father. We had to wait three years to discover whether that was truth or manipulative lie. Heck, even James Earl Jones didn't believe it at the time.As for Ben Solo? Let's see. He was born about a year after ROTJ... At some point he started being trained in the Jedi arts by his uncle Luke. Nothing else for the better part of two decades. As of about five years before TFA he and Luke were off in the Unknown Regions and out of communciations range looking for something as yet undisclosed (though we have our suspicions). Leia's true paternity went public and became a scandal, she quit the Republic senate and formed the Resistance because no one would listen to her warnings about this new faction starting to make inroads from the fringes of known space. We don't know yet how Ben reacted to all this when he and Luke got back. It is implied that Snoke somehow got his hooks into Kylo, probably while they were out there in the Unknown Regions. At any rate, Snoke was nudging Ben toward the Dark Side, Luke felt it, had his moment of crisis and couldn't walk it back in time, and Ben trashed everything Luke had built. He changed his name to Kylo Ren and Snoke gave him command of the as-yet-still-vague Knights of Ren (possibly some or all of those students he took with him when he left the burning wreckage of Luke's academy).
Rey, meanwhile, had been living as a junk scavenger on Jakku for a decade near one of Palpatine's Force-nexus "Observatories". She was left there as a child in the "care" of Unkar Plutt. It isn't clear when she struck out on her own, but I doubt she's been living in that AT-AT the whole time. Her mother told her she'd be back to get her before she flew off in that ship. Over the intervening years, Rey's learned to fend for herself, understand droidspeak, learn the languages spoken in and around Niima Outpost, and pilot speeders, freighters, and tugs, at least. She's had dreams of an island that she doesn't understand. Her "revelation" about her parents in the cave on Ahch-To might be the literal truth, but I feel that the story about her parents selling her for drinking money and being buried in paupers' graves on Jakku is paranoia born out of her feeling of abandonment, and Kylo just picked up on that. We'll have to wait and see. Same as with "Is Vader really Luke's father?"
Really, we know about the same about all of them, to one degree or another.
Introduced so Rey could take them and -- presumably -- study them between films or in Episode IX. As for the other... Luke didn't find that planet til after that disastrous night with Ben, else Ben would know where to find him. By the time he did find Ahch-To, he was wracked with the guilt of his failure and wanting to just run away from it all. The brutal irony of it is that he finally found what he'd been looking for with Ben, but because of what happened, he couldn't bring himself to crack open the texts. He was afraid of what might happen -- that maybe he'd be tempted to re-engage with the Force and with life and with the outer galaxy again.
"You mean it controls your actions?"
"Partially -- but it also obeys your commands."
...And...
"But how will I know?"
"You will know. When you are calm. At peace. Passive."
...And...
(of midi-chlorians) "They continually speak to you, telling you the will of the Force."
"They do?"
"When you learn to quiet your mind, you will hear them speaking to you."
The gist is one of it being a subtle pressure on th elevel of instinct that one is open and receptive to if one is able to quiet one's mind and feel it. With the added implication of the individual having final say as to whether to go with the nudge or resist it. It's not an all-or-nothing "let go and leave everything to the Force" or "it's only conscious wielding of the Force by the individual" thing.
Last edited:
ghostryder
Legendary Member
Joek3rr
Master Member
Yet the two days later, he just about kills him.....................
And the last time I watched TLJ, he didn't kill his nephew. In fact, he stopped himself. Unless you believe Kylo's version.............
ghostryder
Legendary Member
Two completely different situations, and one in which Luke was reactive and forced to defend himself, not proactive.
Joek3rr
Master Member
If I recall Luke attacked Vader first. Yeah, that's what happens. Luke is hiding because he doesn't want to fight his father. Because the Dark Side beckons to him, and he's afraid to fall. But Vader begins to goad Luke into a fight. And eventually, Luke can't fight it the Dark Side, when Vader begins to threaten his sister. And Luke lashes out at him, letting his hate flow through him, letting the Dark Side flow.
ghostryder
Legendary Member
Oh please. Is that the false equivalency you're gonna go with? Feel free to spin and traffic in intellectually dishonesty somewhere else. What happens in this scene is not the same thing - at all:
Ugh, just saw this - I should have known.
Last edited by a moderator:
Joek3rr
Master Member
I don't know what you are even talking about. I literally described the last part of their fight.
"You cannot hide forever, Luke."
"I will not fight you."
"Give yourself to the dark side. It is the only way you can save your friends. Yes, your thoughts betray you. Your feelings for them are strong. Especially for...Sister! So...you have a twin sister. Your feelings have now betrayed her, too. Obi-Wan was wise to hide her from me. Now his failure is complete. If you will not turn to the dark side, then perhaps she will."
"Never-r-r!"
...later....
"Good! Your hate has made you powerful."
So what on earth did I say that was wrong????
ghostryder
Legendary Member
After Luke passively surrenders, the Emperor and Vader are the aggressors on offense in this scene - Luke is acting in defense of Leia and the rebellion.
Joek3rr
Master Member
Doesn't change the fact that he's giving into his anger and hatred. What if he were to kill them both to save the Rebellion but loose his own soul?
Luke is the first to draw his lightsaber twice during the fight.
ghostryder
Legendary Member
We were talking about Luke vis-a-vis the Dagobah meme I (now regret) posting.
If you can't see how the situation differs, there's nothing I can do to help you.
If you can't see how the situation differs, there's nothing I can do to help you.
Joek3rr
Master Member
Of course it's not the same thing.
But their are similarities. In both cases Luke friends and loved ones are being threatened. And he let's that control him. In one case it's the Emperor having DS2 fire on the Rebel fleet. In the second case it's Vader goading Luke with notions of his sister turning. And in the 3rd case it's Luke seeing Ben's dark machinations and possibly the future. In all three Luke reacts, his first instinct is to grab his saber.
People have been wanting this thread to end for months now so this this isn't a new request. Perhaps it would be best if there were two threads. One for those who love the movie and one for those who loathe it.
No one is telling you not to love this movie Joek3rr.
Most of us who hate the movie just want to be heard. Not talked down to or outright ignored.
No one is telling you not to love this movie Joek3rr.
Most of us who hate the movie just want to be heard. Not talked down to or outright ignored.
Joek3rr
Master Member
To further promote division amongst the Star Wars fandom? Two threads is a very bad idea.
Ditto, those of us who love the movie, also want to be heard. And not talked down to or outright ignored.
But I've learned some things. I've learned that there is a double standard, on both sides. And secondly I've learned that the reason that the fandom is divided isn't because of TLJ. It's because we see the entirety of Star Wars differently. I mean everything. The new Star Wars has just brought that to light.
TLJ is a huge part of it, perhaps not all, but it is a factor. Whether for good or ill, ignoring that fact is willful ignorance.
Yes it's obvious that we all see Star Wars a little differently. Fans always have, but the level of division has NEVER been like this before.
That's why I've always tried my best to temper my opinions by openly stating that I'm fine if people love this movie. I don't understand your reasoning but I respect that you are entitled to your opinion. I think you're wrong, but you are free to see it how you choose.
229 pages and nearly a year of heated debate and we are no closer to agreeing on the issue. We never will. I'm fine with that.
What bothers me most is that it's like all of the joy is sucked out of it at this point. There are times when I just want to sell every piece of Star Wars I own and move on with my life. I spent most of my day working on a lingering Star Wars commission and I'm just sick of Star Wars. I'm sick of thinking about it. I'm sick of obsessing about it. I'm sick of collecting it. I'm sick of talking about it.
But like a drug addict I can't kick it. I keep coming back for more.
Yes it's obvious that we all see Star Wars a little differently. Fans always have, but the level of division has NEVER been like this before.
That's why I've always tried my best to temper my opinions by openly stating that I'm fine if people love this movie. I don't understand your reasoning but I respect that you are entitled to your opinion. I think you're wrong, but you are free to see it how you choose.
229 pages and nearly a year of heated debate and we are no closer to agreeing on the issue. We never will. I'm fine with that.
What bothers me most is that it's like all of the joy is sucked out of it at this point. There are times when I just want to sell every piece of Star Wars I own and move on with my life. I spent most of my day working on a lingering Star Wars commission and I'm just sick of Star Wars. I'm sick of thinking about it. I'm sick of obsessing about it. I'm sick of collecting it. I'm sick of talking about it.
But like a drug addict I can't kick it. I keep coming back for more.
Last edited:
@alienscollection.com, the point of all that was Luke was very strongly impelled toward violence in both situations. On the Death Star he gave into it twice and actually swung (first strike in both cases) -- first on the Emperor, then on Vader. In the non-skewed sequence of events with Ben, he ignited his saber but didn't swing. So, contrary to what the meme is saying, while he said he couldn't kill his own father, he sure ended up trying to, but never actually tried to kill his nephew, despite the cold calculation that that one death might save billions of lives. Many of the snarky Star Wars memes I love -- even some of the ones that play a little fast and loose with the facts. That one included. But using it as an apparent arguing point in a discussion as entrenched and heated as this one...? Here it makes me angry at the lack of understanding of the films it implies. *shrug*
Here's the frustrating thing about how this has all played out... I am keenly feeling my lack of a Doctorate in psychology. There's something going on here that I can only vaguely put my finger on. Early discussions felt rational. To keep it on TLJ, there were a lot of elements in the film that some people seeing it caught/understood, while others didn't. Fine. But where things started to break down was when those points were clarified, some apparently refused to accept them and stuck to being angry about something that didn't actually exist.
This has been compounded by elements of the movie that some people subjectively don't like. I'll cite Poe's crank-calling Hux. I love that scene. Everyone I've watched the film with loves that scene. In the theater on opening night, there were many laughs. Yet I see a bunch of folks on here who hate that scene with the fury of a thousand suns, and I cannot figure out why. It is utterly in keeping with Poe's character as established in TFA. Strategically it makes sense -- a single fighter managing to utterly preoccupy the senior leadership of the enemy task force and buying time for the Resistance's bug-out efforts. Not bad.
Part of all that is the perplexing phenomenon of people referencing their subjective dislikes as objective fact, when it so very isn't. Doesn't matter how much agreement there is out there for those viewpoints -- they're still subjective. There are a depressing number of Flat-Earthers, for instance. Doesn't make them right just because they have peer agreement.
Meanwhile, there are technical choices with the film I disagree with, as they clash with the established technique of the previous films. Lenses and editing, mainly. Closer to objective, as there is a body of work this purports to be a part of to which it can be compared and measured in those respects. This goes all the way back, though. One of the things I actually don't like about ROTJ is how hypersaturated the colors are compared to Star Wars and Empire. This continued into the Prequels. It's pretty, but it clashes -- especially if viewed in numeric sequence.
Some of that I have seen effect how portions of the movie land with various audience-members, in person, on the internet, in this thread... Technical matters impacting content perception. Look at the thought exercises into things like: Would Holdo's scenes have landed differently if she'd been wearing a standard uniform? If the character had been male? If the character had been male in fancy evening dress? If the character had been non-human? If there had been external indicators of how fast the ships were going so we could better instinctively grasp that both Resistance and First Order ships were flat-out, but because the Resistance ships had better thrust/mass ratios they were pulling ahead until they exhausted their fuel and were no longer accelerating, would as many people have as many issues with that plot point? Different framing of Leia using the Force to pull herself back to the ship, better fight choreography on the Supremacy, more attention to anachronous terminology... And so on like that.
There are a lot of things, subtle and gross, to be earnestly discussed about TLJ. For all my technical and stylistic gripes, I like it a lot and have watched it a few times on home-video. My love for Star Wars is undimmed, and I am excited to see what happens next -- in Resistance, in The Mandalorian, in the books and comics... Even, guardedly, Episode IX. I am in whole-hearted agreement they should have taken a page from Kevin Fiege's playbook and at least roughly mapped out where they wanted things to go and ridden herd on the writing process for all the new films we've gotten. Too many reshoots, too much second- and third-guessing, too much Mystery Box, too many changes in approach to past precedent, too much story compression... Hell, with the plot points hit so far in TFA and TLJ (and the plot points that should have been part of TFA to not leave the audience at sea), I've mapped out a good five films they could have done, with much better pacing and story/character development...
But that's a far cry from feeling they've ruined Star Wars, and having it affect one's love for the setting in its entirety. That's what baffles and saddens me. And I struggle to even begin to understand the mental workings behind that outlook, as it is so very much not my own. Most of those folks, and a few others, keep repeating demonstrably inaccurate or subjective opinions as if everyone thinks that way -- or should -- and refuse to consider contrary opinions. People whose opinions I normally generally respect on the RPF I just wanna slap in these threads, and I don't like feeling that way (well... about most of you).
The last few posters have touched on wanting to be heard. But the corollary to that is to listen. I see what people are saying. When they're correct where the facts are concerned, I'll support them. When they're in error, and I have the facts to back me up, I'll try to educate or correct. It's never condescending, but done out of a desire to see people be their best. I want people out there in the world speaking accurate-ness. If I didn't care, I'd just let folks go on being wrong. *heh* But when it comes to subjectivity and interpretation, I do not get at all how what should be a simple matter of "I took it this way..." "Oh. Really? I took it that way..." and each goes on with their lives has become such an entrenched, dug-in, bile-spewing, bone-deep need to be Right. About things where there is no "right". Why am I an idiot, a dupe, a blind moron who doesn't know good movies from bad because I take the viewpoint that lets me continue to enjoy Star Wars, flaws and all? I am pretty sure I haven't name-called, talked down to, threatened, or harassed anyone who takes the viewpoint that Star Wars is dead, so is their love for the entire setting, and anyone who spends a dime on anything further is a drooling idiot of the worst caliber. On the contrary, I have tried my damnedest to get where you're coming from, and if I argue... Well, I never do unless I have facts to back me up.
But I have seen some wildly divergent interpretations in these threads of pretty much the whole of anything that's ever had "Star Wars" slapped on it. I stand by what I've said. I feel the filmic evidence backs me up. While I have taken issue with the delivery over the years, the content is the content. If, after everything I've said and cited, one still feels the need to disagree, I feel that speaks to something deeper. But I have not the training or degrees to know precisely what...
Here's the frustrating thing about how this has all played out... I am keenly feeling my lack of a Doctorate in psychology. There's something going on here that I can only vaguely put my finger on. Early discussions felt rational. To keep it on TLJ, there were a lot of elements in the film that some people seeing it caught/understood, while others didn't. Fine. But where things started to break down was when those points were clarified, some apparently refused to accept them and stuck to being angry about something that didn't actually exist.
This has been compounded by elements of the movie that some people subjectively don't like. I'll cite Poe's crank-calling Hux. I love that scene. Everyone I've watched the film with loves that scene. In the theater on opening night, there were many laughs. Yet I see a bunch of folks on here who hate that scene with the fury of a thousand suns, and I cannot figure out why. It is utterly in keeping with Poe's character as established in TFA. Strategically it makes sense -- a single fighter managing to utterly preoccupy the senior leadership of the enemy task force and buying time for the Resistance's bug-out efforts. Not bad.
Part of all that is the perplexing phenomenon of people referencing their subjective dislikes as objective fact, when it so very isn't. Doesn't matter how much agreement there is out there for those viewpoints -- they're still subjective. There are a depressing number of Flat-Earthers, for instance. Doesn't make them right just because they have peer agreement.
Meanwhile, there are technical choices with the film I disagree with, as they clash with the established technique of the previous films. Lenses and editing, mainly. Closer to objective, as there is a body of work this purports to be a part of to which it can be compared and measured in those respects. This goes all the way back, though. One of the things I actually don't like about ROTJ is how hypersaturated the colors are compared to Star Wars and Empire. This continued into the Prequels. It's pretty, but it clashes -- especially if viewed in numeric sequence.
Some of that I have seen effect how portions of the movie land with various audience-members, in person, on the internet, in this thread... Technical matters impacting content perception. Look at the thought exercises into things like: Would Holdo's scenes have landed differently if she'd been wearing a standard uniform? If the character had been male? If the character had been male in fancy evening dress? If the character had been non-human? If there had been external indicators of how fast the ships were going so we could better instinctively grasp that both Resistance and First Order ships were flat-out, but because the Resistance ships had better thrust/mass ratios they were pulling ahead until they exhausted their fuel and were no longer accelerating, would as many people have as many issues with that plot point? Different framing of Leia using the Force to pull herself back to the ship, better fight choreography on the Supremacy, more attention to anachronous terminology... And so on like that.
There are a lot of things, subtle and gross, to be earnestly discussed about TLJ. For all my technical and stylistic gripes, I like it a lot and have watched it a few times on home-video. My love for Star Wars is undimmed, and I am excited to see what happens next -- in Resistance, in The Mandalorian, in the books and comics... Even, guardedly, Episode IX. I am in whole-hearted agreement they should have taken a page from Kevin Fiege's playbook and at least roughly mapped out where they wanted things to go and ridden herd on the writing process for all the new films we've gotten. Too many reshoots, too much second- and third-guessing, too much Mystery Box, too many changes in approach to past precedent, too much story compression... Hell, with the plot points hit so far in TFA and TLJ (and the plot points that should have been part of TFA to not leave the audience at sea), I've mapped out a good five films they could have done, with much better pacing and story/character development...
But that's a far cry from feeling they've ruined Star Wars, and having it affect one's love for the setting in its entirety. That's what baffles and saddens me. And I struggle to even begin to understand the mental workings behind that outlook, as it is so very much not my own. Most of those folks, and a few others, keep repeating demonstrably inaccurate or subjective opinions as if everyone thinks that way -- or should -- and refuse to consider contrary opinions. People whose opinions I normally generally respect on the RPF I just wanna slap in these threads, and I don't like feeling that way (well... about most of you
).The last few posters have touched on wanting to be heard. But the corollary to that is to listen. I see what people are saying. When they're correct where the facts are concerned, I'll support them. When they're in error, and I have the facts to back me up, I'll try to educate or correct. It's never condescending, but done out of a desire to see people be their best. I want people out there in the world speaking accurate-ness. If I didn't care, I'd just let folks go on being wrong. *heh* But when it comes to subjectivity and interpretation, I do not get at all how what should be a simple matter of "I took it this way..." "Oh. Really? I took it that way..." and each goes on with their lives has become such an entrenched, dug-in, bile-spewing, bone-deep need to be Right. About things where there is no "right". Why am I an idiot, a dupe, a blind moron who doesn't know good movies from bad because I take the viewpoint that lets me continue to enjoy Star Wars, flaws and all? I am pretty sure I haven't name-called, talked down to, threatened, or harassed anyone who takes the viewpoint that Star Wars is dead, so is their love for the entire setting, and anyone who spends a dime on anything further is a drooling idiot of the worst caliber. On the contrary, I have tried my damnedest to get where you're coming from, and if I argue... Well, I never do unless I have facts to back me up.
But I have seen some wildly divergent interpretations in these threads of pretty much the whole of anything that's ever had "Star Wars" slapped on it. I stand by what I've said. I feel the filmic evidence backs me up. While I have taken issue with the delivery over the years, the content is the content. If, after everything I've said and cited, one still feels the need to disagree, I feel that speaks to something deeper. But I have not the training or degrees to know precisely what...
Similar threads
